do you start discussions around u redits on the articles complaining about
the removal ofthe info
On Sun, Feb 16, 2025 at 12:45 PM Cameron Kaiser via cctalk <
cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
You're right that "original
research" doesn't go into Wikipedia. But
"major mainstream outlet" is not required. For example, the
Electrologica
X1 article cites sources for its content, most of which are rather obscure
publications such as tech reports in the CWI archives. The point is that
it has to be published elsewhere.
On the other hand, site policy has a long list of what publishers they'll
accept and not accept. Amateur and hobbyist postings to blogs, for
example, are
not accepted, even if it's verifiable or reproducible or otherwise high
quality.
I admit to a bit of pique here: I don't even bother updating Wikipedia
articles
anymore because they'll always get reverted by someone with less of a life
than
me for any number of specious reasons.
--
------------------------------------ personal:
http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems *
www.floodgap.com *
ckaiser(a)floodgap.com
-- Understanding is a three-edged sword. -- Babylon 5, "Deathwalker"
----------